All the evils in the world come not because our desires for happiness are too strong but because they are so weak that we settle for fleeting pleasures that do not satisfy our deepest souls but in the end destroy them. The root of all evil is that we are the kind of people who settle for the love of money instead of the love of God. ~John Piper

The other day, my husband and six-year-old son, McGregor, drove to the park. Upon their arrival, McGregor’s friend spied him and announced, “Wow, you’re rich!” He was referring to the 1978 convertible Beetle my husband recently purchased. To fully appreciate the story, you have to know that the car broke down the day he bought it. My husband and I had a good chuckle over this six-year-old’s perception of wealth.

This morning my prayer is that my soul would find satisfaction in Christ—not pleasure, money, old cars, or even the joy of babies that sleep through the night. Thirst for pleasure is a good thing that only finds quenching in Christ. May we not “settle” today, and in so doing, miss out on true wealth.

There’s quite a ruckus going on at Carmon’s blog because she posted a picture of James Dobson’s son, Ryan, sporting a little biker/cutting edge look. From the onset, I knew there’d be feather ruffling, so I decided to sit back and enjoy the discourse.

Now, I’ll be the first to admit that if I encountered Rockin’ Ryan in a dark alley, I’d probably quickly gather my chickadees to my bosom and tighten the clutch on my purse. I might even just throw my wallet at him and advise my children to, “Run!” Although you can’t judge a book by its cover, well, sometimes a little low-key marketing doesn’t hurt.

Now, before you imagine any stones coming from this glass house, let me say your conclusion is a little premature. It’s nearly impossible to look at the discussion without biased opinion. I happen to like my ankle-length attire, and all I’m missing is a head-coverin’. We humans like things to be black-and-white, and for that matter, sometimes when devising our standards we inadvertently set up a god in our own image. Yet, what we, as Christians, wear is not immaterial; it matters.

I’m not digressing with my story here. My six-year-old son, McGregor, had some sage advice for his 29-year-old unwedded aunt. He said, “I know who Aunt Jacqui should marry—someone who loves God with his whole heart and doesn’t bow down to idols.” We are in the process of studying Exodus during family worship, so this admonition didn’t come as a surprise. However, as I reflect on what he said, I think the kid has a good point.

What we 21st century Christians wouldn’t give that Christ would come back and set it all straight. Still, the children of Israel had fresh manna daily and didn’t even have to interpret the Words of God through a cultural glass, yet they rebelled, set up idols, and went on their own merry, pagan way. They had the complete, ultimate “how to” book, and still deliberately set up gods in their own image, stone idols to replace God-breathed law.

I venture to hypothesize that even if we had a list of “do’s” and “don’ts” for how a 21st century Christian should look, we’d still rebel. The same sin that dwelt in them, is alive and well in us. We are all sons of Adam and daughters of Eve: living, breathing, working, lovin’, and yes, even dressing, in a sin-stained world. To wit, I don’t toss out this Scripture flippantly: Man sees the outward appearance, but God looks at the heart.

The Rockin’ Ryan dilemma centers on how far we should go to become like those whom the Lord has called us to reach. And it is probably a discussion that will go on and on. It is good that we ponder, pause, and pontificate the matter. Let it continue.

But in all our ramblings, let us remember that the ultimate culture-mesher was the God-Man: Jesus Christ. God Himself condescended, took on human form, and became flesh so that we, in turn, could inherit eternal life. When the depth of this truth is internalized in our mortal hearts, then we will know which shoes to wear when we walk out the door.

Now, go love God and don’t bow down to idols.

(Notice her wrist…)

The fact that I am a woman does not make me a different kind of Christian, but the fact that I am a Christian does make me a different kind of woman. For I have accepted God’s idea of me, and my whole life is an offering back to Him of all that I am and all that He wants me to be. (said by Titus 2 older woman, Elisabeth Elliot)

The church is attempting a reformation. The first reformation was regarding our theology. We need to hold tight to this foundation of biblical authority and Gospel doctrine, BUT this current reformation is about OUR CHRISTIAN PRACTICE. There is a great deal at stake. The emergent thinkers are asking great questions, but the answers need to come from the whole body of Christ and need to respect BOTH recent and ancient history. The questions are attempting to give answers as to why the current moral distinction of the church is so pitiful. We do not make disciples well. The church in general has monumental problems that greatly effect our witness. Bloggers need to get engaged in the discussion.

We have dabbled with this new media and learned how to make links and how to make “friends”, but we as GodBloggers have not learned how to make a difference. (from my fellow nominee for Best New Blog, 21st Century Reformation)

God has called me to be a woman—all woman, completely woman—and as Elliot said in my opening quote, that makes me a different kind of woman. To the end of encouraging this current reformation of Christian Practice so that God will be glorified and enjoyed, this is my contribution. Whether I’m walking through Wal-Mart, training my children, or deciding what clothes to wear, these are my observations in chasing after God’s glory in daily life. I want to communicate how reformed thinking translates into reformed living. I only hope that I may live well so that I may blog well, and in doing so, truly make a difference.

Earlier this week, we discussed how what we think has profound implications on the way we live. Ronald Sider discusses George Barna’s latest statistics on the evangelical community in his new book, The Scandal of the Evangelical Conscience:

Barna’s findings on the different behavior of Christians with a biblical worldview underline the importance of theology. Biblical orthodoxy does matter. One important way to end the scandal of contemporary Christian behavior is to work and pray fervently for the growth of orthodox theological belief in our churches.

John Piper asks, “Who would have thought that the very survey system that lures so many to put their finger in the wind of opinion would tell them, Take your finger down and teach the people what the Bible says?”

This week’s Vox Apologia VIII topic is “The Least of These.” If you’d like to host one in the future, go here. In the meantime, here are the entries:

My three pennies worth ponders Inasmuch as You Did It Not: “I had a neighbor boy get dropped off at my house today. No one was very excited about it, either, including me. Maybe, especially me. My children rolled their eyes and groaned, “Not him…” and while I lectured them sternly on playing nicely with him, I was inwardly rolling my eyes and groaning alongside them…”

RazorsKiss writes Spiritual Orphans: Amy relates the expression “the least of these” with children… This comparison is also apt in the Biblical sense. In two passages in Matthew 18, Jesus compares us to children - and we are told to imitate them. He also gives one of the most explicit - and in my opinion, most frightening - warnings in the whole Scripture…

Warnockmiller reflects on The Least of These: “… few of us are really out there living a prolife statement. Even within the church, we don’t welcome the little children the way He does.”

Vessel of Mercy writes The Least of These: “…scripture shows us that it should be a part of who we are as followers of Christ, it is not optional or just the missionaries job.”

Fresh flowers submits The Least of These: We have come face to face with the ‘least of these’ as foster parents. Having one of ‘those’ children become a permanent member of our home has radically changed how we view ‘problem’ children.

Blogotional writes Who are “The Least?”: Because we are among the least, we do not give out of our plenty, we share out of our poverty.

Attention Span writes Closer Than We May Think: Jesus gives us many examples of those in need in the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats, and we know about those needs. But are we overlooking some of the least of these with needs which may not be as obvious to us?

Allthings2all pens (ok, types) Is It Tomorrow Yet?: Is anyone really untouchable in Jesus eyes? When he walked the earth Jesus transformed the lives of those considered “the least”. He is still touching the untouchables. This post reports on a night on the town with Jesus, and the responses and interactions that occur with some of those who are often considered the least important.

Sharing Life writes What You Did For the Least of These: I’m looking on “the least of these” on the basis of Jesus’ story about the sheep and the goats. Our faith in Christ should lead us to deeds of love and compassion for the least of these. They are (in this context) our brother and sisters in Christ who are in distress. Jesus calls us to reach out to them for His sake, regardless of the way society (and we) might look at them.

Northern ‘burbs blog writes The Least of These: We should be taking individual responsibility to care for the less fortunate, and I believe I have much work to do in this area. We show love for God by caring for those in need, and by reaching them on a physical level, in this temporal life, they are more receptive to the Good News that has eternal ramifications.

Weapons of Warfare writes A Dangerous Business: “To know God and make him known!” is my cry and calling. It is a fearful calling, yet a calling filled with blessings; for as I receive one of these little ones, I receive Christ.

I’m so tired and in need of refreshment right now, that instead of hiding under the covers (which is what I should be doing), I read Edwards’ sermon, Safety, Fullness, and Sweet Refreshment in Christ. I’m desperate. I’m a partaker of the human condition, and I’m admitting that I’m in search of happiness. To me, happiness is:

I told you that this site was going to be about my laundry pile. I just didn’t know that it was going to be my husband who wrote about it. Oh well. Introducing guest blogger: Amy’s husband, Greg…
_______________________________________________

The other day I got in big trouble…

In my ongoing effort to help my wife with some of the daily domestic duties, I took it upon myself to do the laundry. Now, this is not the first time I’ve ever done laundry, though after you learn what I did you may think so.

You see, apparently I placed one of my daughter’s red shirts in the load with the light colors. You can visualize the results. Suffice it to say that my wife’s wardrobe now has a decidedly pink leaning trend. Now, I’m not real hip on the latest color trends for spring, but I gather that pink is not popular right now based on her reaction.

Are there such things as Mulligans for laundry mistakes?

[cough, cough...Amy here: "And on her tongue is the law of kindness." Yep. Just ask him. Did you see my profile description about the Proverbs 31 part? Maybe I should emphasize aspiring a little more... ]

Our family has been reading through the book of Leviticus for the last week or so. When I first began, my strategy was going to be to present an abridged version by reading representative passages. After all, Leviticus (as anyone who has decided to read through the Bible in a year knows) is that place where we have given up so many times despite our best intentions.

You know how it is, Genesis is action packed, covering thousands of years from creation all the way to the Israelites in Egypt. You have murder, war, covenants, flood, angels with flaming swords, and such. No trouble getting through that. Then the unfolding drama of Exodus with God wiping out the most powerful nation on earth, rescuing a rag-tag bunch of desert dwellers, and then giving them His special revelation complete with lightenings and thunderings and smoke and fire. Pretty awesome!

Then there’s Leviticus.

Now understand that our children are only 6, 5, 3, and 10 months old. How could I possibly maintain their interest for 20 minutes or so of reading through Leviticus each night? I mean, the repetition, the detail, the stuff about wave offerings, sin offerings, sprinkling with blood, showbread, and clothes for the priests.

You know what I mean.

But, they listen. Not only that, they eat it up.

It is so much fun re-discovering EVERY word of the book of Leviticus and seeing it with the child-faith of my kids and finding my “faith as a little child” stirred once again.

But back to the clothes – specifically those made for and worn by Aaron and his sons as they served God in the Tabernacle. I’ve seen those pictures, perhaps you have too, of Aaron all decked out in his robes with his breastplate, ephod, and turban. In all those pictures he is wearing the most spotless, clean, white, and brightly colorful robes you have ever seen.

Perhaps because of my recent laundry debacle, it struck me tonight that that cannot at all be how Aaron’s clothes really looked. Hmmm, God inspires fresh insight in a variety of ways doesn’t He? (See honey, it’s not all bad).

From the very start, those garments were stained with the anointing oil and the blood from the altar. Chapter 8 says,

Then Moses took some of the anointing oil and some of the blood which was on the altar, and sprinkled it on Aaron, on his garments, on his sons, and on his sons’ garments.

Aaron’s clothes were not just tinted pink because of a laundry mistake. His garments were a bloody mess from day one. And day after day, as they offered sacrifice after sacrifice, those robes would be stained deeper and darker with the blood of the lambs, bulls, doves, and goats offered for their own sins and the sins of the people.

One lesson we have learned and re-learned as a family is that the work of atoning for sins is a bloody, awful, nasty mess. But, our prayers have been filled with thanksgiving to God for the clean clothes of Christ’s righteousness that we now wear because He endured that bloody, awful, nasty mess so that we would not have to.

Thank you, Father, for big lessons learned in the small details of life!

I have this amazing ability, which my husband admires, and that is that I can peg people pretty accurately. (I’m a pessimist, so that helps a little.) If your theology leans a little toward a charismatic view of Scripture, you might say that I have the gift of discernment. For all you cessationists, let’s just say that I’ve got your number.

However, upon strolling through a few other sites, I’ve noticed that there are a few of you who have the same ability. In other words, you’ve got my number too. I enjoy perusing other people’s blogrolls because what they read tells me a lot about who they are. Often site owners will categorize their lists, and I’ve found myself under a few interesting categories (unless someone else creatively named their site Amy’s Humble Musings). However, the thing that amazes me the most is that I often find this site categorized under “Reformed” and/or “Homeschooling.”

I’ve never used the terms “homeschooling” or “reformed” to describe our family.

Now, we do homeschool and our theology is reformed in nature; I’ll say it. I have avoided mentioning it because I hoped that they were questions that did not need to be asked. When I write a post on my interactions with my children, I hope it leads one to conclude that what we are teaching our children all day long cannot possibly be occurring in a public institution. You already know that I’m passionate and a radical, so I assume that leads you to conclude that we’ve jumped off the mainstream. Humor me here.

When I praise Charlotte for her faith in allowing the Lord to send her twins (recently God chose to take one back) when she already has 11 children, this means that I trust and hope in the sovereignty of God: that He is using our covenant children to build His kingdom and that His provision not only applies to our salvation but extends to our practical needs as well. Not only is He faithful in eternity, but He is steadfast in the daily as well.

I believe the labels, “homeschooling” and “reformed”, might loosely apply to the convictions that we hold firm; they are just natural terms to describe what we are doing and believing. I like to cut to the chase. At the same time, I tend to avoid the use of labels for three reasons:

1. Labels don’t always encompass what you’re labeling, and they often include things that don’t belong with what you’re labeling. For instance, we “homeschool,” but we don’t do school at home. That is, we do not replicate the institutional model that comes to mind when one says the word “school.” Most education passes on to the learner by means of conversation. This has been the most effective model for centuries, and more importantly, the Bible uses this method in Deuteronomy 6 when it instructs parents on what it is that we are to teach our children (to borrow a paraphrase): who God is, what God has done, and what God requires of us. Notice that algebra is missing from this list.

We teach our children academics, but we pass along quadratic equations in the context of a Biblical worldview. Perhaps a better label of what my husband and I are doing would be “discipling.”

2. Another reason that I avoid the use of labels is that sometimes people have a misunderstanding of what the label means, and therefore, they peg you wrongly.

3. Probably the biggest reason that I avoid the use of labels is because I do not want to offend. If I offend, I try to let it be God’s Word that offends and not a misused, misconstrued label attached to my sleeve. I have enough problems keeping myself out of trouble as it is. But again, I definitely sympathize with the shorthand.

So, when I met a woman this week at a playground off an I-95 exit somewhere in South Carolina, she approached me and declared, “My, what a fat baby!” (Baby Energizer’s sole purpose in life right now is to help me strike up conversations everywhere with everyone.) I conceded that Baby Energizer sure does like her chicken-pot-pie. Then she quickly cut to the chase and inquired, “Are you a homeschooler?”

Gee, how’d she know?

I pointed out that I wasn’t wearing a denim jumper, and I pointed out that she, too, is a homeschooler, as she has a baby and toddler underfoot. (Hint: learning doesn’t begin at age six.) Then, she asked me if I was religious. (That was a good one.) Now, not only do we talk the part, but we “look” it as well. (I’m thinking it was the Von Trapp family line-up that we do when we call our kids?)

We believe wholeheartedly in both our responsibility as parents in raising godly children as well as the sovereignty of God as it relates to all of life. And we, as a family, also embrace enthusiastically those who come to different conclusions on the matter. Yet in a nutshell: yes, we homeschool, and yes, we are reformed.

But I guess you already knew that.

I passed this sign on my way home yesterday. I can’t shake it that nobody at the church has realized its error as it languishes there for many days. Bonus points for the first commenter who points out the obvious Biblical text that should immediately come to mind.

I used to think that nobody read church marquees, but I have to admit that my husband and I rubberneck now, gawking at each passing one. They’re just too good not to discuss. We need something to do since our kids don’t bother squabbling in the car. ;)

Now, I’m not an uptight person. I can appreciate the good feelings that the sign intended to convey. But at some point, we must concede that modern evangelicalism is falling far short of Biblical orthodoxy. The message of the cross continues to take a back seat to feel-good theology. Look around. The signs are everywhere.

I couldn’t resist posting this one today. Not only do I not make this stuff up, I don’t even have to go far to find it. Both signs (yesterday’s and today’s) were sighted within two miles of my house. I’m happy to report that my home church’s marquee (a quarter of a mile away) still lists only the service times.

[In case you scrolled down for more commentary, I'm happy to report that I accomplished my once a month shopping trip to Wal-Mart Supercenter last night. Due to the extensive brain and brawn that feat requires, I bring to the table only this five minute post. Maybe I'll be out of recovery tomorrow. Or maybe not.]

I just read your post on the Nancy Ganz books and was wondering how exactly your family uses the books. My two and six year old would be overwhelmed to sit and listen to all the passages listed and the whole chapter but breaking it up seems like it would destroy the flow. I love the ideas presented and the language used and want to make it work now–not in three years when they are “older”…

Thank you,
Karen

Karen is referring to a commentary series for children written by Nancy Ganz that I mentioned in passing on an earlier post. So far, commentaries on Genesis, Exodus, and Leviticus are in print, and more books in sequence are due in the fall I hear.

Now, by answering her question online here, I don’t want to give the impression that the way we “do” family devotions is the only way or even the “right” way. It’s just our way. Each family is unique and each father’s gifting in how he teaches his children is different. To women, I say, do what you can to make him succeed.

To say why we choose to use the Ganz books, I have to back up and mention our earlier beginnings. When we married, Greg decided that family worship would be one of the rituals that we developed into our family culture. As a married couple, this was pretty easy as there were only two people to coordinate, and for the most part, we were able to sit still through the ordeal.

We had some fits and starts. I remember sitting at the table in our rental house on the lake and wanting to love what we were doing but being totally bored out of my mind with a very old and dry commentary on Revelation. I hope that the first time he knows of my boredom is when he reads this post later today. I’ve always tried to encourage and appreciate any effort –whether it succeeds or not—that my husband extends in moving our family toward godliness.

Later on, we got into a good routine of reading John Piper’s series titled, A Godward Life. They are short Scripture-saturated essays that stimulated much discussion (and prayer) late into the night.

When the children began arriving, we used a children’s bible, prayer, and singing as our nightly routine. Over time, however, we began questioning the use of a children’s Bible storybook as the best use of time. Since faith comes by hearing the Word, using a children’s book can not be a substitute for the Bible. Yes, our children liked the pictures and (very) loose paraphrase, but our goals for that time at night could only be met by reading real Scripture.

This is where Karen’s question comes in. How do you get them to listen?

I remember a dilemma I encountered teaching first grade in the public school system before I had my first son. After lunch and playground time when all the kindergarteners usually took their naps, I had the kids find a quiet spot on the floor while I read for fifteen minutes from a chapter book. I chose The Boxcar Children for its ease of reading, simple vocabulary, and interesting story line. As many techniques as I employed, the children just wouldn’t listen. I’d tried everything. The bottom line was that they were simply bored and uninterested in such a thing.

As parents, however, I’m convinced that a child’s interest in reading is in direct proportion to how much they read themselves and/or are read to. This is especially true in the young years, as you are establishing habits (or a culture, if you will). Sesame Street will not establish a love of reading in children.

Now, I remember a few years back that my husband would read aloud a chapter book that was above their ability. This was after devotions but before bedtime. The “rule” was: if you could listen quietly –hanging off the side of the couch or playing Legos on the floor—then you could stay up late instead of going to bed. Everyone always chose to stay up. I think this was a key part in creating an atmosphere of listening to read alouds, while expanding their vocabulary and propensity for such things.

To be more specific, we break up some of the chapters in the Ganz books, as they are too much for all of us to digest. Some of them would take an hour just to read the text, leaving no time for Scripture and prayer. Over time, we’ve learned to ad lib, adjust, and use the book as a tool instead of a program.

Now, our preschooler has never experienced the kiddie bible storybooks; she has just grown up with our present routine. Additionally, Baby Energizer will never know any different, and she does well too. I want to say here that nobody sits in hardback chairs with their hands folded and a stern look on their face. It’s just a natural part of family life that our kids protest if we happen to miss.

It all started in 1995 at a commons table in the education building at UCF. I was an Arminian who ate lunch three times a week with three hyper-Calvinists. I’m a glutton for punishment. The battle waged for months as they threw out their Calvinist verses and I retorted with my Arminian ones. I held my ground.

Then the day came that they told me that I wasn’t saved because I didn’t believe “the truth.” So, I agreed to go to a conference that they had urged me to attend—just to get more ammunition for my arsenal. It was the 1995 Defending the Faith conference sponsored by Ligonier Ministries. I signed up to volunteer in the bookstore so that I could attend for free. I wasn’t paying for this stuff.

I reported to my volunteer position as scheduled and quickly realized that this wasn’t going to be all bad. I was taking over the spot for a tall, dark, and handsome fellow. While I was in a room full of people with bad theology, at least one of them was graced with some good looks.

So, as he was leaving, I inquired, “Where are you off to?”

He replied, “RTS. I have a class in an hour.”

So I responded, “RTS? [Note: this stands for Reformed Theology Seminary.] That must mean you’re a Calvinist, which means you believe in Limited Atonement. How can you believe that stuff and call yourself a Christian?”

I’ve always preferred the subtle approach. Yet, this was the line that sealed my fate as the future Mrs. McGregor Scott. I highly recommend it if you are single. (Unless the guy is an Arminian.) The doctrine of Limited Atonement was my last holdout (as I claimed to be a four-point Calvinist) but it was the means that got me my first lunch of many to follow with my future husband.

Over a meal the next day, he explained how Christ’s blood is effective for the elect. Another term to describe this is “particular redemption.” He communicated grace to me during that lunch, setting me free from the belief that all Calvinists forsook the Great Commission, lacked love, and emphasized divine sovereignty to the exclusion of human responsibility.

I suspect that the love part was easy to exude, as he confessed later that he knew that day that he would marry me.

Hyper-Calvinism is as much a threat to biblical theology as any other heretical doctrine. It is essentially a rejection of historical Calvinism. While I maintain that good theology is essential, Paul reminds us in First Corinthians 13 that without love we are “sounding brass” and “clanging cymbals.” My hope is that I may think rightly in order that I might live rightly before Him.

Good theology is crucial. And it doesn’t hurt the state of affairs of a single girl either.

Now that I’ve come out of the theological closet, before we move on, there are three things you should know about me.

1. I’m terrible at sight-reading choral music.
2. I’m terrible at sight-reading choral music.
3. I’m terrible at sight-reading choral music.

That is to say, rather than taking the bait in the post below, I’ve been busy cussing losing my salvation sitting at the piano. That was tongue-in-cheek, of course. Coupled with staying out too late having coffee with a great gal I met online (!), I am worn out and cry, “Mercy!” Calvinist or Arminian, unearned or earned, offer me some grace.

All I have to say is that the signs were there all the time. And for my own entertainment (and hopefully yours), I offer the following Top 10 Reasons You Should Have Known I Was a Calvinist:

10.The liberal use of the adjective “covenant” before “children.”

9. I can’t sing from memory all the verses of “Just as I Am.”

8. I never wish you luck.

7. You read Marla’s expose’.

6. I plagiarize Elisabeth Elliot and John Piper.

5. I can’t make a casserole as good as my Baptist girlfriends.

4. Romans 9 isn’t cut out of my Bible.

3. I can’t name any televangelists.

2. I smile at the insult “frozen chosen.”

And the number one reason you should have known I was a Calvinist:

1. I read the Bible.

This is all in fun, of course. I hope you take it as such. I think it’s important to be able to laugh sometimes. In effort to wrap up the discussion, I wanted to comment on a few things mentioned.

We shouldn’t have any creeds but Jesus and the rejection of the terms “Calvinism” and “Arminianism”: To say that one has no creed but Jesus is a creed in itself. As such, a Jehovah’s Witness or Mormon can claim the same thing, but it really means whatever the hearer wants it to mean. While this can be readily understood among like-minded folks (and I understood the meaning of those who said this), the terms must be clearly defined, especially in a post-modern culture. And so, the historical Church has adopted such means as The Westminster Confession, The Apostle’s Creed, and other like statements.

Furthermore, I think the use of labels in the context here is helpful and not equivalent to the reprimand in Corinthians not to follow teachers, but Christ. (One of you says, “I follow Paul”; another, “I follow Apollos”; another, “I follow Cephas”; still another, “I follow Christ.” I Corinthians 1:12) Insofar as Calvin was faithful to the Scriptures, I can say that I am a “Calvinist.” Instead, however, I could say that I ascribe to Biblical Theology, but that leaves two problems. The first is that you wouldn’t think I was being faithful to my weblog title—“humble” being the key word. The second is that the terms are not clearly defined. And so, the use of a shorthand label is easier than saying, “Yes, I believe in the perseverance of the saints, that God will not allow any of His own to slip out of His hand; yes, I believe that I was completely dead in my sins and that even my faith was a gift so that I may not boast…”

And so, my blessings to all, and to all a good…afternoon. (Except to that guy who reads this site in Japan.)

There are many reasons that churches split, but the single most rampant reason in recent decades has been over the infamous Worship War. The older generation wants to keep things “the way we’ve always done them” while the younger generation desires a more hip, relevant worship style.

As the church pianist in all the congregations I find myself in, I try to stay on the outskirts of this debate as I believe that the two opposing parties are usually asking and debating the wrong question. The debate should not be about choruses versus hymns, but rather, about man-centered versus God-centered worship. Anything less is dealing with the subject superficially. Furthermore, there is an aspect of yielding my preferences to yours that can not go overlooked. For a good resource on the subject, pick up Reaching Out Without Dumbing Down: A Theology of Worship for This Urgent Time by Marva Dawn.

Hymns: they have rich history and doctrine in their favor. The reason to embrace them is not for their sentimental value, but for their content. Without a doubt, today’s choruses contain a lot of fluff—with a few notable exceptions– and lack the maturity of many of the old hymns, the bad ones notwithstanding. Why? Because the current culture lacks the mature faith of the old hymn writers, and immature faith translates into immature music. Could I pen the following? “Let sorrow do it’s work/ Send grief and pain/ Sweet are Thy messengers/ Sweet their refrain.” It does me well to read, sing, and meditate on those whose faith is beyond my own–contemporary and traditional.

But that doesn’t answer the question of where to fit in God-centered, God-exalting choruses. Scripture commands us to sing a new song unto the Lord. And herein lies the rub with singing choruses. In short, if within the congregation there is not the ability to lead the worshippers in a manner that is not distracting, then a church should embrace the form that brings the most attention to God, not man. It is extremely rare to attend a contemporary, hymns-banned church where the words on the wall actually match what you are supposed to be singing, the worship leader isn’t wearing shades and a Hawaiian shirt, the worship team doesn’t have a lady flaunting a miniskirt, and all the microphones actually work and are in balance.

In order to touche’ myself, it is also important that the traditional pianist pay attention to how many verses are in a hymn. But I don’t want to talk about that anymore.

In the same vain, anyone who thinks hymns are the only way to worship has not visited another culture or another time in history, pre-Puritan. The Church should uphold that music which is mature, aesthetic, and God-centered, no matter the era it was written.

Just in case you think I’m out of touch, the very first time I sang a hymn other than Amazing Grace was when I went away to a fundamental, no-leaving-your-dorm-on-Wednesday-night-because-someone-might-think-you-skipped-church, KJV college at the age of 17. Before then, I grew up in various charismatic churches, some of them were cults by definition. If you are a psychologist, you might surmise that my rejection of a lot of modern worship is due to the influences of my childhood and my resulting dismissal of the doctrine, lifestyle, and hypocrisy that went along with it. But is important not to throw the baby out with the bathwater, and so, I like to think that I am looking at the situation critically and deliberately—embracing the good, rejecting the bad. I don’t always succeed.

And so now, when I find myself in a Hawaiian-shirt worship service, I worship sincerely along with them. These are my brothers and sisters in Christ, and while I have my preferences, I know that the right way to worship God is not with (often misplaced) high standards, but with my love for the brethren.

Book Review: Hymns for a Kid’s Heart
It is only fitting that I take the chance here to review Hymns for a Kid’s Heart. The Diet of Bookworms program sent this to me a couple months ago, and we’ve enjoyed wearing out the book and the CD that came along with it. I’m writing this post in response to an earlier question regarding how to teach our children hymns and what to do when you attend a church that doesn’t sing hymns.

The reason our children know many hymns by heart is not because we attend a church that sings them, but rather, because they live in a home that uses them for daily worship (along with solid choruses). There are many children in our church who do not know any hymns, but that is because of the failure of the parents, not the church. Deuteronomy 6 delegates the nurture and training of His children to parents, and while corporate worship is a part of that training, the primary responsibility rests on the parents alone.

Beside a traditional hymnbook, books such as Hymns for a Kid’s Heart are helpful in teaching the history and circumstances of hymns. With colorful illustrations, easy chord charts for guitar players (and lazy pianists), and engaging stories, Hymns for a Kid’s Heart is a delightful read. I appreciate that they included all the verses, as much kiddie media usually only utilizes the first verse. This is a mistake most publishers make, but thankfully, not this time. People underestimate the ability of a three-year-old to sing all the verses of A Mighty Fortress Is Our God. They can do it!

Common hymns are included (like Holy, Holy, Holy and How Firm a Foundation) and a couple not-so-common hymns (Eternal Father, Strong to Save and The Lord’s My Shepherd, I’ll Not Want). The only selection I disagree with—in order that I might be consistent with my above-stated philosophy—is the inclusion of America, the Beautiful. It is not God-centered, God-focused, and therefore, not a good choice among the collection. Nevertheless, Hymns for a Kid’s Heart is a good selection if you’re looking to teach your children a few good hymns from start to finish.